SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1955 Supreme(Raj) 284

DAVE, WANCHOO
Sainiks Motors – Appellant
Versus
State Transport Authorlty – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ratanlal, for Applicant; Murlimanohar Vyas, for Non-petitioner No.3; L.N. Chhangani, Government Advocate

Wanchoo, C.J.—This is an application by Saniks Motors and two others under Art 226 of the Constitution of India and arises in the following circumstances :—

2. The applicants are permits holders of certain buses plying on the Jodhpur, Pali, Sojat, Bar, Beawar route. It appears that there was some inconvenience to the public and the buses of the applicants, which originally terminated at Bar, were allowed to go up to Beawar. It also appears that the permits were countersigned by the Ajmer authorities. There was also another bus service between Bilara and Bar and that was similarly extended for the same reason to Beawar and the permits in that case also were countersigned by the Ajmer authorities. In 1954, however, there was an application by these operators holding permits from Jodhpur to Beawar and Bilara to Beawar to the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur,by which they obtained an order that the extension granted up to Beawar would be subject to the condition that the Jodhpur-Beawar operators will make two daily return trips between Bar and Beawar and Bilara-Bar operators will make one daily return trip between Bar and Beawar. It seems that this caused inconvenience to certain p










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top